demand for the right to self-determination seems to have become an end in itself. He is accused of conducting his struggle in a bubble, without any reference to the changing ground situation in Kashmir, rise of India as a global player or the larger geo-political situation in the region and the world.
Geelani has his own reasons for cynicism. He thinks a formal engagement with New Delhi is nothing but a devious process of diplomatic merry-go-round which doesn’t get anywhere. He is for dialogue with New Delhi but before that wants centre to acknowledge Kashmir as a disputed territory and also seeks involvement of Pakistan as a party in a trilateral process between New Delhi , Islamabad and Kashmiris. And to top it all, he also rejects any new settlement proposals on Kashmir and insists on UN resolutions on Kashmir to be the starting point for any initiative on the state.
Geelani has proved himself unable to get out of this mindset. But for his admirers, Geelani’s utility is not in seeking a solution but in being himself and in preserving the sanctity of the Azadi demand. Geelani as such, is a symbol, a personification rather than the representative of the Valley’s aspirations. But even if we give Geelani this role, we still need a leader who will reassure us about the sanctity of the pursuit of a solution.
